Tuesday, 8 September 2015

Anecdote for the Day

Here's an anecdote that may signify something...

My place of work is full of people who don't usually sound off about BBC bias (in fact, ever). And yet today two people came into work and, almost immediately and quite independently of each other, started really fuming about the BBC for questioning the killing of two 'British' Islamic State jihadis by UK drones.

Apparently, they'd heard a BBC interviewer challenging a government minister over the rightness of the drone attacks. My workmates didn't like that interviewer's line of questioning one bit.

"What's wrong with them?", one of them asked about the BBC. "They shouldn't ask such questions", said another. Others joined in, adding things like, "They're terrorists. They left Britain and want to kill us. They deserved what they got".

They began again later in the day. The first person said, later in the day, "I'm still really peed off about that." The second person agreed, saying, "I just don't understand why they would ask such questions. I don't get it". Others joined in again.

Well, those are my 'vox pops' for the day - 'entirely unscientific', as Jonathan Dimbleby might say, but nonetheless perhaps suggestive of where many a British voter (and non voter) appears to stand on this story (away from the media's microphones and the the pollsters' questions).

To be perfectly honest, I share the concern about killing a citizen without trial or warning. I've made the same complaint on B-BBC back when the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate-in-Chief was doing it regularly. I'd have no problem if the President said, it's war, he was on the battlefield, the end. But that's not how it happens, and this President has already shown total disregard for the rule of law when it comes to going after domestic opponents.

Of course, the BBC wasn't so concerned about the legal nuances when their beloved Obamessiah was doing it.....